© Kamla-Raj 2014 Int J Edu Sci, 7(3): 653-662 (2014)

Teaching Functions Using a Realistic Mathematics Education

Approach: A Theoretical Perspective
Judah P. Makonye

Marang Centre for Mathematics and Science Education, School of Education, University of
Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, Gauteng, 2193 South Africa
E-mail: Judah.makonye@wits.ac.za
KEYWORDS Multiple-representations. Conjectures. Strategies. High School Learners

ABSTRACT This paper discusses how the notion of a function can be developed for high school learners through
the use of different representations and models; verbal, visual, graphical and symbolic. The realistic mathematics
education approach provides the framework that guides the discussion. Using the matchstick problem as an
example, multiple-representations of the function concept inherent in it are mathematised. The possible
representations of the function are; geometric patterns, independent - dependent variables, ordered pairs, fish
diagrams, number sequences (quadratic sequences, arithmetic sequences, geometric sequences), dual bar graphs,
graphs on the Cartesian plane and the functional f(x) symbolism. It is argued that multiple representations that
start with the informal and every day and then gradually progress to the formal and abstract, help learners to gain
insight of the big idea functions in mathematics. The paper provides mathematics educators a platform which
facilitates a realistic mathematics education approach to teaching functions which can be extended to other
mathematical topics.

INTRODUCTION ers in Zimbabwe, such traditional teachers often

advise learners that in order to determine wheth-
Many times students learn mathematical con- er a graph represents a function, or not, they
cepts without understanding them because some need to use the vertical line test. The test as-
teachers teach them procedures without con- serts that if the vertical line crosses a graph once
nections to their contextual experiences (Stein only, then the graph is deemed a function and if
et al. 2000; Balacheff and Gaudin 2010; King it crosses more than once then it is not a func-
and Bay-Williams 2014). Such teachers, often tion. Also learners may be asked to substitute
called traditional teachers, hold instructional an integer in a given function f(x), (say at x = -2)
conceptions that are usually shaped by the meth- to find if there is a single real number output.
ods which they used to master mathematical Although learners may perform this test by mak-
concepts and the teaching methods used by ing correct substitutions to evaluate f(-2), they
their teachers during school days when they hardly understand the essence of the notion of
were learners themselves (Lubisi 1997; Viirman the function and how important it is to mathe-
2012). The primary goal of traditional teachers is matical discourse. Such learning is problematic
for learners to find answers to problems using because it encourages learners to memorize pro-
legitimate mathematical processes such as ap- cedures without understanding them which
plying formulae, definitions, axioms or theorems. may limit their transfer or connections of learnt
This approach to teaching mathematics that concepts in new and novel situations. Such
emphasizes procedural competencies is often learning is restrictive and may not enable learn-
done at the expense of learner conceptual un- ers to achieve the five fundamental goals of
derstanding of mathematical concepts and pro- learning mathematics; of reasoning, making
cedures (Hodgen et al. 2009). When teaching connections, applications, communication and
mathematical functions, traditional teachers be- problem-solving (National Council of Teachers
gin with a definition, that it is an equation in- of Mathematics 2014).
volving inputs that lead to unique outputs with Furthermore, learning mathematical concepts
the property that each input is related to exactly by rote where learners rarely understand why
one output, rather than the learners given situa- they are bothered to study concepts such as
tion definition in which they can form the func- functions can de-motivate them. In the absence
tions themselves. When teaching functions to of contextual learning of functions learners can
Grade 9 learners in South Africa or form 2 learn- find it difficult to justify why they ever learn
654 JUDAH P. MAKONYE

them. Yet the function concept is one of the most ematics as it is the substance that keeps togeth-
fundamental concepts and biggest ideas of mod- er the underlying mathematical concepts and
ern mathematics that forms the glue that ties procedures. Despite this fact, the function con-
mathematical concepts together (Shenitzer and cept is often misunderstood, by teachers and
Stillwell 2002; Viirman 2012). The argument of learners. For example, the basic arithmetic oper-
this paper is that in line with reform pedagogy ations of addition, subtraction, multiplication
emphasising constructivist learning, “teaching and division are functions in that each of them
mathematics is equipping students with concep- process two numbers in a certain way to get
tual understanding of the process skills that another number. Thus all arithmetic operations
enable students to individually or collectively can be viewed as functions that map points on
develop a repertoire for constructing powerful the Cartesian plane R2 to the real line R1. The
mathematical constructions that concur with vi- appreciation that the processes of addition,
able mathematical knowledge” (Nyaumwe 2004: subtraction, multiplication and division repre-
25). Thus, the function concept being such a sent the object called a function is not com-
fundamental concept in mathematics deserve monly understood. This unawareness of the
learner active participation for them to concep- fundamental laws governing mathematics par-
tually understand it and be able to apply it in ticularly by teachers is regrettable since their
their future mathematical studies. Traditionally, teaching often marginalises the core concepts
mathematical procedures were given more im- of mathematics. This paper is important be-
portance in the teaching and of learning mathe- cause it brings to light some assumptions held
matics, while conceptual understanding if at all by both teachers and learners on the function
was given little attention. Such an approach flies concept that are seldom considered in teach-
in the face of learner conceptual understanding ing and learning mathematics.
which really has potential to enhance learning The function concept is often taught with-
of mathematics in the long term (National Coun- out relation to everyday context. Formal mathe-
cil of Teachers of Mathematics 2014). Active matical symbolism of the concept such as f(x) is
construction of mathematical concepts is possi- sometimes prematurely introduced to learners
ble because from a constructivist perspective, which may result in some learners developing
mathematical concepts are tentative, intuitive, misconceptions about it as the manner of teach-
subjective, and dynamic that they are contextu- ing is divorced from meaning to the learner.
al as they originate from human activities within When the function concept is wholly taught
a given context, and therefore, are not universal using the mathematical context that learners do
and fixed. This notion gives insight to believe not understand, the learners may face find diffi-
that Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) culties to understand it. The paper delves deep
(Freudenthal 1991; Gravemeijer 1994; Webb 2010) into the minute details of the function concept
approaches have potential to help learners to which may inform teachers about how to intro-
understand the big ideas of mathematical con- duce the concept to learners in a conceptual
cepts such as functions. way. The argument of the paper rests on the
In efforts to understand the active nature of belief that some teachers are not aware of the
teaching the function concept to Grade 9 learn- obvious notion that number sequence is also a
ers the present study had two goals to pursue. function, yet they struggle to get examples to
Firstly, the study seeks to demonstrate the per- illustrate the notion of a function
vasiveness of the function concept in mathe- The argument of the paper rests on the as-
matics where it is often denoted by an uncon- sumption that the use of the realistic mathemat-
nected variety of mathematical representations. ics education approach may provide learners
Secondly, the study attempts to demonstrate with examples from their day- to- day experienc-
how the realistic mathematics education ap- es, which may help to counter their lack of un-
proach can help learners to construct themselves derstanding of the function concept. The ap-
complete understanding of the mathematical proach may also induce interest in the learners
structure of functions. to learn mathematics as it is assumed that realis-
The significance of the study lies in the as- tic contexts may capture their affective domain.
sertion that the function concept is one of the The approach may facilitate learners’ readiness
biggest ideas that builds the discipline of math- to accept mathematical symbols on function
TEACHING FUNCTIONS FOR CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING 655

concept when they are eventually introduced that mathematics teaching should always be re-
because learners may have seen the necessity alistic; connected to real situations, have con-
for the symbols. The realistic mathematics edu- nections in learners’ everyday lives and be rele-
cation approach is also very useful in contex- vant to society at large in order to be of human
tualising the same concept such as a function value. The word realistic goes beyond that math-
in different forms. This multiple modelling of ematical problems originate from the learners’
concepts may help learners to understand the real world contexts. It also includes mathemati-
mathematical concepts associated with the cal problems encountered in mathematics learn-
function concept in their totality. By paying ing as long as they are relevant. In line with
attention to detail on the obvious routine consructivist-fallibilist philosophy (Hersh 1997),
events, this theoretical paper may be signifi- Freudenthal regarded mathematics as a human
cant in advancing the quality of teaching and activity that should not be studied only for its
learning of mathematics in general and the top- aesthetical beauty as in Platonic and Absolutist
ic functions in particular. philosophy of mathematics (Ernest 1991). He
argued that mathematics should be studied for
Literature Review its utilitarian purposes because at the very be-
ginning, mathematics in classical times (such as
The realistic mathematics education ap- during ancient Egypt and Babylonia), was in-
proach is an important approach used to teach vented as a tool for solving the practical prob-
mathematics in many countries such as the Neth- lems that humans encountered in their daily lives.
erlands, the UK and the USA (see for example, Such problems involved counting, measurement
Lange 1996). Yet this approach has not been ofland and time. Such mathematical processes
fully exploited to teach mathematics in Africa, were necessitated by the need, for example, to
particularly in South Africa which has a low learn- allocate agricultural land fairly along the fertile
er achievement rate in mathematics. Traditional river valleys where civilisation started. Calendar
approaches are based mainly on exposition of a and time keeping; aided by careful studies of
mathematics problem that is solved through a the regular movement of heavenly bodies; such
model answer on blackboard. Such “chalk and as planets and stars, were important for inter-
talk” approaches which characterise most class- preting planting and reaping seasons, as well as
rooms can work for some learners, but most keeping religious ceremonies.
learners may come to hate mathematics through Thus it can be so argued that mathematics
this method. This is because learners do not was invented by humans to serve their purpos-
know the reason for learning mathematics other es. Being a human activity, it requires a human
than to pass examinations. Other learners are element in its learning. As such, it has to be
perplexed by mathematical notation which char- appealing to the curiosity of those who learn it.
acterizes mathematics. The result is that for most Also, RME argues that mathematics ought to be
learners mathematics is rendered a dull, lifeless taught through guided reinvention using care-
and meaningless subject. In many cases, learn- fully chosen realistic problems where students
ers develop various misconceptions in mathe- “can experience a similar process compared to
matics because they are expected to memorise the process by which mathematics was invent-
too many mathematical concepts that are not ed” (Zulkardi 2002: 4). The reinvention being
relevant. The realistic mathematics education underlined by exploration, trial and error, intui-
approach addresses this problem by encourag- tive and conjecturing approaches in which learn-
ing mathematics to be more relevant and appeal- ers are encouraged to engage in mathematical
ing to learner needs. RME makes learning math- discourse related to their everyday experiences.
ematics meaningful and enjoyable to learners. Freudenthal (1991) proposed that the process
Once learning is meaningful and enjoyable to of doing mathematics is mathematisation.
learners, the sky is the limit for their successes. Two types of mathematisations which were
The philosophy of realistic mathematics ed- formulated explicitly in an educational context
ucation Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) by Treffers (1991) are horizontal and vertical
holds mathematics as a human activity that is mathematisation. In horizontal mathematization,
connected to reality (Treffers 1991). This theo- the students come up with mathematical tools
ry, originated from Freudenthal’s (1991), argues which can help to organize and solve a problem
656 JUDAH P. MAKONYE

located in a real-life situation. On the other hand, working with motivating contexts. As such, it is
vertical mathematization is the process of reor- crucial for teachers to select mathematical prob-
ganization within the mathematical system itself. lems that trigger learners’ interest. These must
Freudenthal (1991) and Gravemeijer (1994) ar- intrinsically invite learners to want to engage
gued that horizontal mathematisation involves with the problem and want to solve it. Learners
going from the world of life into the world of attack the problem with all the prior knowledge
symbols, while vertical mathematization means that they already possess and as well as any
moving within the world of symbols from sim- resources available to them. The RME approach
plex to complex. contrasts with the top-down teaching approach
RME is a teaching and learning theory that in which teachers first expose the mathematical
views mathematics as a human activity that is knowledge and procedures. Learners are forced
connected to reality (Treffers 1991). Thus, the to learn them without the “raison de étre” (a
reform curriculum emphasise problem-solving as French phrase which means reason for exist-
a teaching approach that enables learners to ence) to learn them. In contrast, in the realistic
develop mathematical concepts from common approach, learners begin to attain formal mathe-
activities in their environment through solving matical knowledge and symbolism when they
problems that they encounter in their environ- understand the need for them. They appreciate
ments. Mathematical problem-solving generally them because they come to notice their brevity
involves presenting learners with written word and elegance. Also should they forget a mathe-
problems in which the learners interpret the prob- matical formula, they can easily retrace their pro-
lems, and devise methods to solve them, follow- cesses when they first constructed the formula.
ing certain mathematical procedures to obtain a So when they use the realistic approach, learn-
result. Problem-solving activities permeate the ers consciously seek for structure, for mathe-
boundaries of the subjects offered in a curricu- matical symbols and terminology for the con-
lum as they provide holistic contexts in which cepts that they have already handled. Mathe-
mathematical concepts and skills can be devel-
matical procedures and knowledge are thus re-
oped and mastered (National Council of Teach-
invented and rediscovered in a meaningful man-
ers of Mathematics 1989). The advantage of
problem-solving in a realistic environment of ner. Learners then may be able to easily vertically
teaching mathematics is that it can bridge infor- mathematise as they will be using mathematical
mal mathematics and formal mathematics. knowledge whose basis they are comfortable with.
The major assumption underpinning this In working with the realistic contexts learn-
study was that the realistic approach holds great- ers may start by using intuitive and informal
er potential than the traditional approach for methods to explore the mathematical problem at
developing learners’ conceptual and procedural hand. As such, trial and error is necessary “boot-
knowledge on the notion of a function (Hiebert strapping” in which learners try to figure out the
and Levevre 1986). When developed in a realis- exact nature of the problem and its parameters.
tic way, the mathematical notion of a function They figure out how the problem relates to what
can be modelled in various ways such as verbal- they understand and know. At this level learn-
ly, numerically, geometrically, algebraically, ers are encouraged to freely formulate and test
graphically (Suh 2007). These multiple-represen- conjectures on the problem. As learners move
tations of the function concept though appar- forwards and backwards with their attempted
ently different at face value actually convey the solutions to the problem, they begin to under-
same concept. A unique underlying mathemati- stand its characteristics, as well as viable and
cal structure of the function, relates to all as unviable solution paths. Freudenthal (1973) and
these representations which are isomorphic to Treffers (1991) encourage moving back and forth
each other. For example the representations; from informal mathematical methods to precise
geometric pattern such as matchstick arrange- and formal mathematics during the process of
ments, number sequence, algebraic nth term and mathematising.
graph represent what is called a discontinuous In the following paragraphs, we discuss how
function (verbal form). the study of manipulatives and visuals (in the
As the RME approach argues, learners must matchstick problem) can help learners to deeply
be guided to re-discover mathematics by first understand the different informal representation-
TEACHING FUNCTIONS FOR CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING 657

sof a function alluded above, through horizon- the pattern three matchsticks are added to the
tal mathematisation. This leads to the need for previous one. This is the first aspect of informal
the formal mathematical structure and symbol- mathematising; horizontal mathematisation. Fig-
ism of the function. ure 1 gives a pictorial representation of the pat-
tern that emerges from arranging the match sticks
Matchstick Problem as the Basis for Teaching Table 1 is used to systematically analyse the
Different Functions Representations pattern inherent in the matchstick visuals; which
pattern at first is hidden from learners. Drawing
An illustration of how the mathematical func- a picture and drawing table are some of the heu-
tion concept can be developed using match- ristics suggested by Polya (1973) for problem
sticks in learners’ environments is discussed solving.
next. Matchsticks are usually available the envi- Figure 2 below prepares learners for abstract
ronments of many learners. The match sticks reasoning as they need to figure out the colours
can be used to make shapes as illustrated below. for shapes that require large numbers of squares,
Matchsticks are arranged to form of succes- for example 55 squares. Table 1 shows how learn-
sive squares by adding matchsticks to a previ- ers can be lead to move away their thinking from
ous diagram as illustrated in the Figure 1. concrete objects to abstract thinking that gives
rise to a function concept.

I can write a
story problem:
Matchstick
problem verbally
told

I can made it
using I can physically
mathematics show it:
symbols e.g. f(x) Matchstick
patterns with
Matchstick really
matchstics
problem

I can write it I can draw a

with numbers: picture of it: fish
ordered pairs; diagramm, object-
table or image sets;
Fig. 1: Matchstick pattern arithmetic graph etc.
sequence

From the squares in Figure 1 learners are

asked to find the number of matchsticks in each Fig. 2. Modelling the matchstick problem in dif-
of the diagrams. The learners will notice that the ferent ways and levels of mathematisation
first diagram has 4 matchsticks, the second has
7 matchsticks, the third has 10 matchsticks and From Table 1 the function suggested by the
the fourth has 13 matchsticks. Learners may be matchstick problem is f(x) = 3x +1, where x is the
asked to answer the following questions in or- number of squares and f(x) the number of match-
der to extend their thinking. sticks in that square.
i. Hence, find the number of matchsticks
required to make 55 squares Multiple Representation of the Function
ii. Find the number of squares which can be Concept Represented by the Matchstick
made by 226 matchsticks Problem
iii. Draw the graph to represent the relation-
ship between the number of squares and The function of the matchstick problem can
the number of matchsticks. also be represented in many other ways such as
In answering this question it is important for using a fish diagram. The Fish diagrams can il-
learners to realise that to get the next figure in lustrate the input output definition of a function
658 JUDAH P. MAKONYE

Table 1: Conjecturing and inducting the pattern/function inherent in the visual

No. of squares 1 2 3 4 5 … n -1 N

No. of matchsticks 4 7 10 13 16
(Simple counting
thematchsticks in
the real Fig. 1)
No. of matchsticks: 4 4+3 7+3 10 + 3 13+3 n -1 + 3=
Conjecturing (Level 1) (n-2)+3 =
To get the next figure n-1+3
We just add three more =
matchsticks to the n+3 -1
matchsticks in the =
previous figure (shown n+2
in different colour in
Fig. 2)
No. of matchsticks: 4 4+3 4+3+3 4+3+3 4+3 4 + a certain
Conjecturing (Level 2) +3 +3 number of
+3 threes (the
+3 number of
threes which
we are not sure
of)
No. of matchsticks: 4 plus 4 plus 4 plus two 4 plus three 4 plus four
Conjecturing in words zero three one three threes threes threes
(Level 3)
No. of matchsticks: 4+0x3 4+1x3 4+2x3 4+3x3 4+4x3
Conjecturing in ...
arithmetic (Level 4)
Inductive stepHow (0)=1– 1 (1)=2 -1 (2)=3-1 (3)=4-1 (5)=6–1 (n–1)= n –1
many three? ... This is just equal
to
the figure number
minus 1 !

No. of matchsticks: 4+ 3 4+3 4+3 4+3) 4 + 3 (6-1) 4+3(n-1)

Concluding (inducting) in (1– 1) ( 2 -1) (3-1) ( 4-1 … = 1+3n
arithmetic and = 3n +1
algebra(Level 5)

is the relation summarised by the function y= tion when learners play with a story and begin
f(x) = 3x +1. From the fish diagram learners can see some patterns and move on to conjecture
deduce that for each value of x, there is a corre- mathematical relations inherent. This leads to
sponding unique value of y. vertical mathematisation. When students have
The matchstick problem can be modelled in engaged in such learning they can always get
several ways (see Fig. 3) so that the same con- back to horizontal mathematisation when they
cept of a function that underlies the problem forget some aspects in vertical mathematisation
can be represented in various ways (Suh 2007) because they will be familiar with the realistic
which representations on the surface and at first contexts that motivate the formal mathematics.
Thus the matchstick pattern can be used to
appear dissimilar. Multiple representations of develop learners’ conceptual understanding of
concepts in these ways (Fig. 3) helps learners to the function concept using inductive reasoning
see the links, the relationships between them through visuals. At each of the stage of multi-
that earlier seemed to be unrelated. Such multi- ple-representations, learners should be given
ple representations are the cornerstone of build- ample time to discuss their deductions with their
ing conceptual understanding (Kilpatrick et al. peers so that they can socially agree on the im-
2001) of the function concept. This, as has been portant skills described below that they are ca-
illustrated, builds from horizontal mathematisa- pable of developing:
TEACHING FUNCTIONS FOR CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING 659

Fig. 3. Fish diagram for the matchstick problem

1. Verbally describing a pattern of figures built approach as illustrated above, mathematics can
by squares formed with matchsticks become sensible and motivating to learners.
2. Visuals in the form of squares (see Fig.1) When developed using multiple representations
3. The number pattern 4; 7; 10; 13; 16; …called arising from learners’ contexts, the function con-
an Arithmetic Progression, first term 1 and cept may be fully understood. This can give
common difference 3. learners a strong foundation for studying simi-
4. A fish diagram (see Fig. 3) lar mathematical concepts successfully.
5. Ordered pairs (1; 4), (2; 7), (3;10), (4;13),…
6. Diagrammatically as a pair of object - image DISCUSSION
sets which are matching (that is, those in
one-one correspondence and have the The power of the Realistic Mathematics Ed-
same cardinality). ucation approach in teaching different functional
7. Algebraically as y = 3x + 1, or f(x) = 3x + 1, representations is that it bridges informal and
where x is a whole number (see Fig. 4). formal mathematics. In particular it does not
8. Visually, much more formally in the form of down-grade informal mathematics but rather, it
a Cartesian graph. uses it as a base for developing formal mathe-
The researcher believes that when number matics. Exploration of mathematical concepts
patterns are taught and learnt using the RME using out-of-school, day-to-day approaches is

Fig. 4. Cartesian graph for the matchstick problem

(vertical mathematisation)
660 JUDAH P. MAKONYE

encouraged as a basis of learning that can lead devote extra effort to understand mathematics,
to strong understanding of mathematics con- even if at first they find it hard to understand a
cepts and processes. Such approaches help to certain concept. Such learners are likely to re-
break the everyday knowledge and school gard anew mathematics concept from various
knowledge dichotomy which is a concern to perspectives in an effort to understand it. The
many educational researchers (see Boaler 2008). realisation that mathematics is internally ordered,
When learners have problems with formal math- motivating and fun can only rise as students
ematics, such as in the use and meaning of math- mathematise by making conjectures on real world
ematical formulae, they can always revert back phenomena that appeals to them.Then they
to the first principles of horizontal mathematisa- would think of ways of solving can provide
tion which gave rise to those formulae. The mech- (Hallett and Bryant 2010; Siegler et al. 2013).
anistic (traditional) approach that emphasizes
knowledge of mathematical symbols and mas- CONCLUSION
tery of procedures (Hiebert and Levevre 1986;
Kilpatrick et al. 2001) is discounted by realistic Regarding the teaching and learning of the
approaches. The realistic approaches are ground- function concept, the researcher argues that stu-
ed in mathematical contexts and conceptual dents can also understand that a sequence is a
knowledge (Hiebert and Levevre 1986) through function whose domain is a set of natural num-
horizontal mathematisation. Further the realistic bers. Further, students will be able to notice that
mathematics education approaches as discussed there are different types of functions; some con-
in this paper have potential to raise learners’ in- tinuous and some not. Some are formulae func-
terest in mathematics as learners observe inter- tions, some are trigonometric, and some are hy-
relationships in functional representations which perbolic and so on. Later on at higher levels still,
at face value appear unconnected. they can differentiate among injective, surjec-
Different representations of functions tive and bijective functions. Such knowledge is
through geometric patterns, number sequences the basis for studying linear algebra, abstract
(quadratic sequences, arithmetic sequences, algebra, functional analysis and mathematical
geometric sequences or otherwise), discontinu- analysis for those who wish to specialise in math-
ous graphs on the Cartesian plane and the func- ematics at very high levels. The pertinent point
tional f(x) symbolism can help learners to gain being that once the basic notions of the func-
insight of one of the biggest ideas in mathemat- tion concept are studied properly at lower levels
ics. As students move between different con- and the variations of the function concept are
texts and representations of the function con- understood through building the concept
cept they can realize that though mathematical through use of simple matchsticks as discussed
ideas may appear different, that difference is of- in this paper for example, learners can be em-
ten at a very superficial level. They need to see powered to understand a big idea in mathemat-
the difference between function and form. They ics and study mathematics meaningfully at any
can also come to realize that such differences in level.
fact are sublimely inter-connected and interre- The researcher strongly argues that if stu-
lated by a single idea. Such perceptions are crit- dents study functions in the manner discussed
ical in raising learners’ conceptual understand- in this paper, they can develop a strong founda-
ing, procedural fluency and productive disposi- tion for mathematical conceptual and also math-
tion to mathematics (Kilpatrick et al. 2001). Learn- ematical procedural knowledge that helps them
ers who successfully learn through RME ap- to study other mathematical concepts meaning-
proaches begin to realise the logical structure fully. They can now see the need for special
and compactness of mathematics. They can see mathematical symbolisms and see that they are
its explanatory power for daily problems and the useful in generalizing their ideas as well for com-
underlying beauty of mathematics. Such advan- municating their ideas to other people. RME
tages cannot be appreciated by those who re- helps learners to see the close relationship be-
gard mathematics with unsophistication. Once tween mathematics conceptual knowledge and
it dawns on students that mathematics is not a mathematical procedural knowledge. RME thus
mechanical, capricious and mindless subject stu- helps to diminish mathophobia and thus pro-
dents can become more prepared and ready to motes productive disposition in mathematics
TEACHING FUNCTIONS FOR CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING 661

which is the most important strand to promote ing functions (and mathematics) in Southern
meaningful learning of mathematics. Africa and beyond.
RECOMMENDATIONS
NOTE
Given the argumentation based on the expo-
sition of teaching the function concept in Grade This paper is written in memory of a dear colleague; the
lae Prof. L.J. Nyaumue (born in Zimbabwe) who passed
9 proposed in this paper, it is recommended that: on in June 2012. He inspired me to work hard in my
 the teaching of the function concept (and mathematics education research.
other mathematics concepts) must start
with stories and games motivating and en- REFERENCES
chanting to learners in a way that the
teacher can easily ask some questions that Balacheff N, Gaudin N 2010. Modeling students’ con-
ceptions: The case of function. Research in Colle-
induce learners to think mathematically giate Mathematics Education, 16: 183-211.
about the problem Boaler J 2008. Open and closed mathematics: Student
 that teachers strive for learners to realise experiences and understandings. Journal for Re-
the multiple representations of a concept search in Mathematics Education, 29(1): 1-62.
(stories, visuals, pictorials, graphical and Ernest P 1991. The Philosophy of Mathematics Edu-
cation. London: Falmer Press.
then abstract) in their teaching to that learn- Freudenthal H 1973. Mathematics as an Educational
ers develop a comprehensive understand- Task. Dordrecht: Reidel.
ing of the target mathematical concept Freudenthal H 1991. Revisiting Mathematics Educa-
 that research be done to determine how the tion. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Gravemeijer KP 1994. Developing Realistic Mathe-
teaching of the functions topic using the matics Education. Utrecht, Netherlands: Freuden-
RME and multiple representations ap- thal Institute.
proaches discussed in this paper would af- Hallett DNT, Bryant P 2010. Individual differences in
fect grade 9 learners’ conceptual understand- conceptual and procedural knowledge when learn-
ing fractions. Journal of Educational Psychology,
ing of the topic. 102: 395–406
The researcher is of the belief that if such Hersh R 1997. What is Mathematics, Really? Oxford:
recommendations are implemented in mathemat- University Press.
ics teaching learners’ productive disposition of Hiebert J, Lefevre P 1986. Conceptual and procedural
mathematics will greatly improve and their moti- knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analy-
sis. In: J Hiebert (Ed.): Conceptual and Procedural
vation for learning mathematics stoked up. Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 1-27.
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY Hodgen J, Kuchemann D, Brown M 2009. Secondary
Students’ Understanding of Mathematics 30 Years
on. Conference Presentation, British Educational
This is a theoretical paper and therefore one Research Association (BERA) Annual Conference,
of its weaknesses is that its conclusions have University of Manchester.
not been tested in the empirical field. However Kilpatrick J, Swafford J, Findell B 2001. Adding It Up:
from this researcher’s experience, many teach- Helping Children Learn Mathematics. Washington,
ers use a procedural approach to teaching math- D. C.: The National Academies Press.
King G, Bay-Williams JM 2014. Assessing basic fact
ematics in which mathematical symbols and pro- fluency. Teaching Children Mathematics, 20(8):
cesses are foregrounded and taught in mathe- 488–497.
matics lessons as if for their own sake. This is Lange Jde 1996. Using and applying mathematics in
often done without first exploring the contexts education. In: AJ Bishop, K Clements, C Keitel, J
Kilpatrick, C Laborde (Eds.): International Hand-
that motivate these processes. Also the research- book of Mathematics Education, Part One. Dor-
er has observed that when mathematics is taught drecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher, pp. 49-97.
in this way learners and even teachers fail to see Lubisi RC 1997. Beliefs on the Nature and Assessment
the big ideas that make mathematics such a pow- of Mathematics: A Case of Pre-service Teachers.
erful subject. Hence despite these limitations, In: M Sanders (Ed.): Proceedings of the 5th Annual
Meeting of SAARMSE. Johannesburg: University of
the researcher believe this paper based on the Witwatersrand, pp. 247-251.
Realistic Mathematics Education and use of mul- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 1989.
tiple representations in mathematics teaching Curriculum nnd Evaluation Standards for School
and learning proffers a fresh approach to teach- Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
662 JUDAH P. MAKONYE

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Suh JM 2007. Tying it all together, classroom practic-
2014. Principles to Actions: Ensuring Mathemati- es that promote mathematical proficiency for all
cal Success For All. Reston: VA: Author. students. Teaching Children Mathematics, 14(3):
Nyaumwe L 2004. The impact of full time student teach- 163-170.
ing on pre-service teachers’ conceptions of mathe- Treffers A 1991. Realistic mathematics education in
matics teaching and learning. Mathematics Teacher The Netherlands 1980-1990. In: L Streefland (Ed.):
Realistic Mathematics Education in Primary School.
Education and Development, 6(36): 19-30. Utrecht: CD-b Press / Freudenthal Institute, Utre-
Polya G 1973. How to Solve It. Saltburn: Anchor. cht University, pp. 223-278.
Siegler RS, Fazio LK, Bailey DH, Zhou X 2013. Frac- Viirman O 2012. The Teaching of Functions as a Dis-
tions: The new frontier for theories of numerical cursive Practice: University Mathematics Teaching
development.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, from a Commognitive Standpoint. Paper in Pro-
17(1):13-19. ceedings of the 12th International Congress on Math-
Shenitzer A, Stillwell J 2002. Mathematical Evolu- ematical Education. Seoul: ICMI, pp. 1559-1568.
tions. Mathematical Association of America. Wash- Webb DC 2010. Collaborative design of instructional
ington D.C.: Mathematical Association of America. sequences: Teacher developed support for forma-
Stein MK. Smith MS, Henningsen MA, Silver EA 2000. tive assessment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 9: 153–157.
Implementing Standard-based Mathematics In- Zulkardi J 2002. How to Design Lessons Based on the
struction: A Casebook for Professional Develop- Realistic Approach. Utrecht: University of Twente
ment. Reston: NCTM. Freudenthal Institute.